The real Glaswegian working class voice in the independence debate read by thousands, the BBC and other related media, secured the first criminal conviction against one of the seven top cybernats outed by the Daily Mail

Saturday, June 30, 2012

Here is an update on Scottish National Party discrimination which flourishes under you and Nicola Sturgeon’s leadership.

I have yesterday received a letter from the person who filed a complaint against me, National Secretary William Henderson.

The letter was dated the 20th June 2012; the letter was delivered 29th June.

Given it used a first class stamp; it doesn’t take 9 days to deliver a letter.

Under the SNP rules, I am supposed to be given two full weeks notice of a hearing, I am to be given 5 working days.

Another aspect of how the process is to be rigged, William Henderson says I can only have another SNP member in attendance thus denying me my human rights to select a person of my choice.

Also it is worth mentioning that the complainer (Henderson) has also spoke to the Convenor who is effectively one of the judges outside the process regarding the complaint.

Under the human rights act, I haven’t been afforded what is called equality of arms.

The process to brand me homophobic will go on, I haven’t been afforded my proper human rights; I haven’t been afforded fairness, equality and social justice.

Looking at this people may conclude that I am to be found guilty based on the National Secretary William Henderson’s version of what he thinks a post on The Campaign for Human Rights at Glasgow University means.

That is discrimination.

I have absolutely no faith in the Scottish National Party’s processes because it is clear to me that everything is being done to find me guilty of something which I never done and also there is no proof to substantiate the vacuous claim made against me.

It is obvious that The Scottish National Party has no intention of respecting even my basic human right to representation by a person of my choice. It has to be from within the SNP.

So, what do we know Mr. Salmond as proven facts, we know, I have been discriminated against and we know you, Nicola Sturgeon and Peter Murrell know the details and are quite happy to allow bullying in your own party.

Friday, June 29, 2012

This is funny, WikiLeaks founder Julian Assange has been asked to give himself up to the British Police after they popped by the Embassy of Ecuador in London and chucked in a surrender notice.

You can see the funny side straight away, stay put in relative comfort or leave and be locked up in a prison.

It is a toughie but I think Assange will stay put; he has done so for the last nine days since seeking political asylum.

Assange is wanted for extradition to Sweden, where he is to be questioning about alleged sex offences against two women.

The 40-year-old told the BBC's Newsnight programme that he will not be heeding the note to attend Belgravia police station at 11.30am today.

Assange has better things to do and who wants to be arrested on a Friday anyway?

Asked if he would be going to the central London police station, he said:

“Our advice is that asylum law both internationally and domestically takes precedence over extradition law so almost certainly not.”

And since the Police cannot violate the Embassy of Ecuador, it was a rather pointless exercise by Police in the first place.

Police said they had formally “served a surrender notice upon a 40-year-old man that requires him to attend a police station at date and time of our choosing”.

It added:

“He remains in breach of his bail conditions, failing to surrender would be a further breach of conditions and he is liable to arrest.”

The statement is in line with UK police policy.

The embassy still considering Assange’s claim for political asylum has declined to comment.

Assange has called for diplomatic guarantees he will not be pursued by the US for publishing secret documents if he goes to Sweden to face allegations of sex assault.

He won’t get it, if the Americans get their hands on him; he is facing a lengthy prison term, probably life without parole.

However, interestingly, Assange says he is prepared to go to Sweden to face questioning over the claims, but fears Stockholm will turn him over to the U.S. where he could face espionage and conspiracy charges over revelations by WikiLeaks.

The Assange case is a real diplomatic problem for the British Government, they are stuck, and it looks possible that the Embassy of Ecuador could grant asylum.

It isn’t in the interests of justice that Julian Assange cannot have his day in court in Sweden, but he believes he has real concerns that once in Sweden; he will be shipped off to the US.

Will the US give up their claim?

I don’t think so; American foreign policy is rather a clumsy instrument at the best of times.

A solution is that the US Government gives a guarantee not to seek extradition from Sweden or while Assange is in transit between Britain and Sweden via any third country.

He gets a pass; the upside for the Americans is perhaps Assange gets tried and convicted in a court of law which destroys his reputation, the downside; they wait longer for him to stick his neck out somewhere else.

If I was the Americans, I would give him the guarantee and let Swedish justice have a clear run.

Efficiency savings is something which has been going the rounds in the Scottish Government for sometime now.

What is efficiency saving?

Its code for a cut, in the main dressed up dressed to look like money has been “found” which has been wasted and could be better spent.

There are other buzz words like ‘prioritising’ which politicians slide in when money is reallocated from one service to another as well.

But for those who aren’t getting the help or treatment, it’s a cut and they are on the receiving end.

Health Secretary Nicola Sturgeon has been strongly criticised for claiming that the closure of a children's hospital ward was not for financial reasons.

In politics; ordinary working class people don’t understand when it seems that children are suffering due to SNP government cuts.

They just don't understand at all!

The closure of the children’s ward in NHS Lothian has caused trade union fury as the GMB union hit out after NHS Lothian who decided to close the unit at St John's Hospital in West Lothian.

Reason for closure was due to the removal of trainee paediatricians.

Last night the GMB's public services senior organiser, Alex McLuckie, claimed "the real reason for this closure is a result of years of cutbacks within the NHS in Scotland".

Mr McLuckie said Ms Sturgeon had claimed the closure had nothing to do with money or resources, but he added:

"Of course it has to do with money. The reason the ward is closing is the health board do not have the resources to staff the ward."

Mr. McLuckie is going to find out in the near future, that cuts cuts and cuts are a sign of things to come, post independence vote.

At present, Scotland is in a bubble regarding health spending, and the ‘Sturgeon bubble’ is going to burst because the pressure from other governments will cause serious problems right across the board.

Why?

There isn’t enough money and there isn’t the political will in the SNP Government to think creatively enough to generate revenue.

The second term of the SNP Government was never about independence, it was about public sector reform.

That has been disastrously sidelined in favour of the status quo for probably the entire term of this increasingly paralysed government while government ministers abandon their desks to chase the independence dream.

The SNP should have started public sector reforms now but didn’t, in late 2014 after the loss of the independence vote, it will be too late to start major reforms and we are talking major reforms.

As to future cuts, the union warned it could be "a sign of things to come" in the NHS in Scotland and could be "the tip of the iceberg".

McLuckie warned:

"We could see more of this as Scottish health boards are told to make more budget savings in 2012. As we hear of this decision in the east of Scotland, in the west of Scotland GMB organisers have been informed that while NHS Greater Glasgow and Clyde – the country's biggest health board – has received £27.7 million from the Government, they are required to make £60m worth of cuts. Greater Glasgow and Clyde proposes to make the cuts by filling one vacancy in every two. How long will it be before they do not have enough staff to resource all their wards and other health outlets? No part of the public sector is going to escape from the austerity measures including the NHS and it is about time we had an honest debate about this."

So, given what is in the wind, people are going to suffer, there is real discontent and the flagship of the SNP Government and Nicola Sturgeon, will come under closer scrutiny.

Cuts allow opposition parties to score political points and hit home with real impact.

Braveheart Alex Salmond admitted yesterday the crisis that had forced the closure at St John's was "unsatisfactory".

Old people can’t get blankets, new born children get wrapped in a towel, dirty hospitals, ambulance crews happy to sit on their arse when people need help because they are on a break, and now a children’s ward is closed down.

The second term of the SNP Government in the health brief under deputy first minister Nicola Sturgeon isn’t going to be remembered as the ‘glory days’!

Thursday, June 28, 2012

Do you know what the problem in saying a soundbyte, it sounds good at the time.

And afterwards then there is the danger of someone coming along and asking questions to any claim being made.

Braveheart Alex Salmond said yesterday the SNP’s fundamental argument for independence was not an economic one.

Speaking at the TEDGlobal2012 conference, the First Minister said that although there was a strong economic case for independence, splitting from the rest of the UK was about Scots governing themselves.

He said:

“I came into politics as an economist, therefore I tend to put primacy on the economic arguments.”

Adding:

“The argument for independence is not fundamentally an economic one. The argument for independence is Scotland as a nation, and nations are better when they govern themselves and nobody is going to take better decisions about Scotland than the people who live in Scotland. But the economic case is very strong and powerful.”

America is governed by Americans and their economy wrecked.

Greece is governed by Greeks and their economy is wrecked.

Spain is governed by the Spanish and their economy is wrecked.

Italy is governed by Italians and their economy is wrecked.

So, the argument that just because someone lives in a place they are best able to run that place is subjective.

Should Scotland be an independent country?

Yes, it should.

But the real questions need to be addressed and one of those questions is the talent in the Scottish National Party behind Alex Salmond and Nicola Sturgeon good enough?

Alex Salmond will probably see a defeat on the independence vote; there are many reasons for this.

Chiefly, the main points are, the work to prepare Scotland to be an independent country hasn’t been done, there is no credible blueprint for a new Scotland, and the SNP cannot answer fundamental questions on the big issues which concern ordinary working class folk.

The SNP can’t even agree on having Scotland in NATO thereby defending properly our country because of their outdated 30 year old policy.

30 years of getting it wrong on defence.

An anti NATO vote is seen by many working class people as anti Scottish soldiers vote and a failure to properly pledge to protect their lives.

And a recent unofficial poll suggested that the majority of Scots serving in the British Armed Forces don’t want to be part of Salmond’s Army.

Another aspect of the lack of thought and planning on defence, is intelligence, in their haste to affirm being anti NATO, how do they expect to get military and civil intelligence when not plugged into the Western defence intelligence grid?

The SNP have to sign up for NATO.

To other matters!

Alex Salmond:

“nations are better when they govern themselves and nobody is going to take better decisions about Scotland than the people who live in Scotland.”

Does that mean he has a plausible explanation why for last 80 years his party hasn’t put forward a real evolving blueprint for Scotland and done the work to a standard that would inspire public confidence?

Alex Salmond:

“nations are better when they govern themselves and nobody is going to take better decisions about Scotland than the people who live in Scotland.”

Can he explain why the SNP Government never contacted the EU about the status of Scotland’s membership?

Can he explain why the SNP never contacted the EU about the status of Scotland’s membership while as an opposition?

Can he explain what will happen when Scotland is told by the EU there is no contract between the European Union and the Scottish Government regarding membership?

Can he explain in the event of a Yes vote if EU law will still apply since there is no formal EU membership agreement?

Can he explain if Scotland isn’t a member and therefore applies how Scotland can stay out of the Euro as a new member?

Can he explain how much will be lost in EU Grants between Scotland leaving the UK and attaining EU legal status as a member and how long that will take to fix?

Can he explain what will happen to Scotland’s credit rating if the Bank of England refuses to be the lender of last resort?

Can he explain why the Scottish Government hasn’t planned for a Scottish pound?

Alex Salmond further added:

“Polls have shown that people want more powers than we have at the moment, but are not yet convinced of the case for independence.”

The independence vote is already lost in my opinion, the reason why is a genuine lack of talent in Scottish National Party, we can expect to hear more from ‘civic’ Scotland for the second question on ‘devo max’.

This is the parachute that the SNP will be backing to show their members after all their efforts they got something.

And also it will be presented as a ‘win’ for the Holyrood 2016 election.

At that election, I expect some SNP MSPs will not be coming back, depending on how things run, we shall see if Alex Salmond stays after that election.

With other factors on the horizon such as austerity right across the board, he may decide to jump and back Nicola Sturgeon as the leader, post election, depending on the outcome, at present, the polls suggest the SNP would still be the biggest party.

But polls change and the Labour Party's star is on the rise again and also the Scottish Lib Dems need to find a narrative to rebuild public trust to regain seats.

Awhile ago I said before the Glasgow Council Election that the SNP would lose, they did so in dramatic fashion.

George Laird was right again.

My next predication was that the SNP would lose the independence referendum, I will be right again and ahead of the curve on that issue.

There isn’t the talent in the Scottish National Party to deliver independence within ‘the middle class clique’ of Alex Salmond and Nicola Sturgeon.

Then will come the British General Election, in probably 2015, disaster, no real change of fortune.

And all this because the SNP didn't plan far enough ahead to be seen as credible, 2014, already lost in my opinion.

Wednesday, June 27, 2012

A mistake was made by appointing Elish Angiolini to run the Commission on Women’s Offenders.

Angiolini spent her time shoving women into Cornton Vale as a member of the Fiscal Service without a second thought.

Now, she is all ‘concerned’ about their ‘plight’ by describing the living conditions for some prisoners as “antediluvian and appalling.”

The Hilton didn’t have enough space.

Angiolini says that the Scottish Government must place emphasis on closing Scotland’s only women’s prison as soon as possible.

This won’t happen and to be blunt, cannot be allowed to happen either!

Prison serves a purpose in society to protect communities.

There is a serious debate however regarding who should be sent to prison and for how long.

It isn’t cheap sending someone to prison, it costs circa £42.k a year to lock someone up, it also means a person in prison cannot contribute to society and pay taxes.

The reality is once someone comes out of prison, they are effectively unemployable; this is another issue in a long series of problems which leaves prison as a revolving door for many people devoid of hope and aspiration.

When people have no stake in society there is no tomorrow.

What is prison when you have nothing?

It is free bed and board, no bills, Sky Telly, plenty of time for reading, educational opportunities, free dental, free medical and free gym facilities, but no pool.

Angiolini was appointed to chair the Commission on Women’s Offenders which recently reported its recommendations to the SNP Government; she said Cornton Vale, near Stirling, was “a miserable place.”

I saw a prison documentary series from her perspective, yes, it would appear to be that way, she has so much, but she doesn’t understand the mentality of those who have absolutely nothing.

And it seems her crank idea of shutting the place down has won some kind of support from Justice Secretary Kenny Mac-Askill.

He announced this week that he had asked the Scottish Prison Service to find alternatives to replace the prison.

Where’s the money coming from in these tough economic times to embark on new prison building?

It is the wrong idea at the wrong time.

So far the SNP Government has confirmed it will take forward 33 of the commission’s 37 recommendations, and consider the remaining four in more detail.

A lot of money is about to be spent by the Scottish Government that will in no way generate the results it expects to break the cycle of reoffending.

What isn’t on offer to prisoners is a future, a fresh start and a better tomorrow.

Cornton Vale should not be closed; if it can be improved then that seems a reasonable suggestion.

The real debate is how to break the cycle of reoffending, and so far I am not seeing a road map to that end.

The idea that Cornton Vale should be replaced with a smaller specialist prison for long-term and high-risk prisoners, as well as regional units to hold short-term and remand prisoners is nonsense.

The Scottish Government really don't understand the problems of these people at all in anyway shape or form.

Yesterday I was checking the blog and found that someone had popped in from The Spectator magazine which is edited by Fraser Nelson, I remember him from Glasgow University.

Anyway someone had posted a link to the world famous The Campaign for Human Rights at Glasgow University blog which is read by thousands.

Since I was semi regular poster on The Spectator, I decided to read the article by Fraser Nelson.

It seems that the Scottish National Party had been invited to a prestigious Spectator debate and then bottled it because the SNP wanted two of their people on the panel.

In real life, it should only take one.

I could have done it no problem, but given the genuine lack of talent in the Scottish National Party, it seems that the SNP wanted to go in ‘mob handed’.

Here is the extraordinary article by Fraser Nelson in full for educational purposes only.

“The Battle for Britain is heating up this week, with the pro-union campaign launched in Edinburgh this morning and a Spectator debate on the union on Wednesday. We have, as ever, a strong lineup – but the Scottish National Party is noticeable by its absence. I thought CoffeeHousers may like to know why not.

We planned the debate ages ago, and from the offset wanted SNP to be on board. As Scottish separation would have implications for the whole of the UK we asked someone to make the case for English separation: Kelvin MacKenzie. And someone to speak up for the union: Sir Malcolm Rifkind. The Nats didn’t like this one bit. We tried to accommodate them, but their condition – that we allow two SNP members to be on the same team – was one we just could not satisfy. We had to go ahead without them. We called Margo MacDonald, who quit the SNP and now sits in Holyrood as an independent nationalist. She said yes immediately and was not in the least concerned about the other panelists, seeming to have complete confidence in the strength of her own argument. As Margo’s fans will know, she has the ballast of about five ordinary parliamentarians.

The SNP’s refusal to take part in the debate was, to me, deeply puzzling. I admire Alex Salmond almost as much as I disagree with him, and The Spectator has awarded him two top gongs in our Parliamentarian of the Year awards in recent years. Is the SNP really so scared of Sir Malcolm? Was there some dislike of the idea of debating on enemy soil? Or did they bridle at our inclusion of an English voice in the debate about Britain? We organize lots of debates at The Spectator. This is the first time anyone has asked to have two representatives on a six-person panel. It seems that the SNP is, to use one of Salmond’s beloved Scottishisms, feart.

Is Sir Malcolm really so scary? Is the prospect of an English audience too intimidating? Or accepting that they are in agreement with Kelvin about the union? Perhaps the prospect of real, non-rigged debate is in itself something that the SNP has reason to be wary of. I’m not sure. But to see what made the SNP demand safety in numbers, do come and join us in South Kensington on Wednesday night for the debate. Tickets are still available, here.

PS: The debate was always going to be a six-person contest over the motion 'It's time to let Scotland go'. Here is a list of the speakers:

For: Gerry Hassan, Kelvin MacKenzie and Margo MacDonald

Against: Sir Malcolm Rifkind, Rory Stewart MP and Iain Martin”.

The Spectator Debates are prestigious, to be asked on is a coup in itself, as Fraser Nelson said, no one in its history has ever tried to rig the panel to suit their own ends.

Many will see this as another sign of why things are going badly for the independence campaign, I see their confidence falling, I see no vision, I see no ideas, I see no preparation to make Scotland an independent country, I see basic and also complex questions which cannot be answered at any level.

I see a lack of genuine talent in the Scottish National Party.

It appears the analogy that ‘one man can make a difference’ doesn’t apply to the SNP; they need to go in ‘mob handed’ in a rigged contest set up to suit their purpose.

I could have done this debate no problem, I have the skill, the vision and the big ideas, I would have defeated Malcolm Rifkind.

It seems that some in the SNP leadership may have a geniune fear of taking on the heavy weight senior Westminster politicians who have real gravitas.

Tuesday, June 26, 2012

Yesterday saw a slick presentation of the Yes UK Campaign, pitched perfect, with gravitas and low key to connect with ordinary people.

There wasn’t the Hollywood factor but there didn’t need to be to get the desired result.

Less than a day later Braveheart Alex Salmond has accused the pro-union lobby of using smoke and mirrors and a campaign mired in negativity.

Clearly Alastair Darling has made an impression as Alex Salmond is looking increasingly desperate and rattled with this ill-judged outburst, the independence launch was recognised by many as utterly dreadful right across the political divide.

Alex's day with the rich and powerful is how many saw it.

Alex Salmond hasn’t had a real solid political opponent to fight in years, now he does, former Chancellor Alastair Darling has serious gravitas, he is a heavy hitter from the Westminster Village.

Rather than draw attention to the Yes UK Campaign the First Minster has wrongly decided to lash out after former chancellor Alistair Darling formally launched the Better Together campaign in Napier University.

Well received by the press, good presentation done in a good setting and an excellent video, what I expected.

When opponents do a good launch, you don’t draw attention to it, but go the opposite way; you welcome it and rally the troops.

Awhile ago I said the SNP need to avoid ‘Chardonnay’ moments which came into the public domain when SNP list MSP Joan McAlpine was said to be called ‘Chardonnay’ by former press colleagues.

They thought of her as a “wee white whine”.

Now is not the time to whine.

Alex Salmond launched his attack claiming Darling had made a "threadbare case" in which he had said "not a single word about the anti- independence campaign's alternative vision of more powers for the Scottish Parliament".

He added:

"That is because, at heart, this is a Tory-led campaign, which is intent on conceding nothing to the people of Scotland, and hiding behind its refusal to spell out an alternative policy before the referendum."

He doesn’t need to, Darling is on the front foot; he is campaigning to save what he believes in, there is no electoral mandate for devo max.

Devo max isn’t seen as part of the real equation, the unionists won’t be playing Alex Salmond’s game, quite the opposite.

Alastair Darling as part of his pitch has insisted Better Together would rely on making a positive case which celebrates "not just what makes us distinctive but also celebrates what we share".

He said:

"We are positive about our links with the rest of the United Kingdom, through families and friendships, through trade and through shared political, economical and cultural institutions."

And he tossed in the spectre of a border between Scotland and England and the prospect of turning "our biggest market into our biggest competitor".

Mr Darling added:

"This is no abstract debate. It's about jobs, and pensions, and the welfare state, and the survival of businesses."

Alex Salmond responded:

"No rational person seriously believes that England would cease to be a major market for Scotland's goods and Scotland for England's following independence."

It is no real concern what the Yes UK Campaign are doing, yes they should be looked to see if they are open to criticism on policy, but attacking their launch looks like desperation in my opinion.

A recent poll puts support for independence at about a third depending on which one you read as a start point!

Alex Salmond has met someone who hits hard, and is fast on his feet; Salmond can’t tackle him in Holyrood and is forced into a ‘street fight’.

Perhaps the First Minster should have gone the statesmanlike route and welcomed the challenge.

In the Westminster Campaign of 2010, Alex Salmond was declaring that he could control a block of 20 MPs thereby exerting influence on what he believed would be a hung government.

In the end, it was the same 6 elected previously returned to Westminster, and John Mason who won Glasgow East in a by-election was defeated by about 13,000 votes.

Mason done a good stint as an MP but never realised that there was a problem lying in wait as I repeatedly told him, he need to do more to hold the seat. His work rate in the Commons was excellent but the strategy to hold it proved less so.

I warned him at a council by-election and also at the European election count, which Labour won 60% of the vote in his area, by then the direction of travel was already set back towards Labour.

Margaret Curran won that election so easily.

Down the road at Westminster, an argument broke out in the House of Commons Scottish Affairs select committee were SNP MP Eilidh Whiteford said she was the victim of abusive comments from Labour chairman of the committee Ian ‘the deerhunter’ Davidson.

Immediately following her accusation, she withdrew from the committee and the SNP backed her on unfounded allegations which there were no witnesses to support her version.

By walking out the decision is proving to be a costly one for her party as no one is there to put an alternative voice despite the committee leaving the door open for her return.

And the fact that every other member of the committee jumped to Davidson’s defence who isn’t exactly Mr. Popular suggests that there may have been another reason.

The SNP need someone in the House of Commons Scottish Affairs select committee now!

That committee is landing some seriously damaging punches on the independence campaign through its inquiry and cross examination of witnesses.

Although not the most skilled at Westminster, the segment on defence was very interesting indeed.

Should Dr. Whiteford, the heir to Salmond in Banff and Buchan return?

That is up to her, but someone should be appointed, he who tells the story writes the history, despite Commons rules saying she should be replaced if she misses three meetings, the door is open.

It is time to stop playing politics, maybe the SNP hoped a boycott of the committee would make the process look partisan and discredited, this has not happened.

Tactically withdrawal was a blunder in parliamentary terms for the SNP.

While that committee sits, the committee members and their witnesses can openly speculate and look at different scenarios, most of which would leave Scotland far worse off.

The SNP is very good at basking in the sun when things are going their way, the independence campaign was bouncing along until the disastrous ‘Declaration of Cineworld and in the minds of some the boycott may have been thought as a shrewd strategy by masterminds now it is looking decidedly ill-judged and out of touch.

The reason in my opinion was no one was looking long term.

SNP MP Eilidh Whiteford should be sent back or else a replacement found.

Monday, June 25, 2012

The Yes UK Campaign has formally launched this morning led by former UK chancellor Alistair Darling.

And it seems that unlike the debacle of the ‘Declaration of Cineworld’, the launch was well received by the press.

Because the launch was pitch perfect towards the people that matter most ordinary people.

The Yes Scotland Campaign could be characterised as very much the opposite, Alex Salmond meeting the rich who in turn give him their blessing and support.

Who in their right mind picks a cinema to launch an independence campaign?

Rushed, botched and woeful!

Have you heard the expression just say no?

Well someone should have stood up when Cineworld was proposed and said loudly:

‘F*ck no’!

But no one did because no one had vision.

This morning Yes Scotland got a lesson in campaign launching.

A recent poll stated after the Yes Scotland launch support for independence dropped.

It dropped.

Momentum has stalled and now Yes Scotland is going backwards.

Today’s launch of ‘better together’ was all about ordinary people, it was the right strategy, pitched at the right audience and in the right place.

Darling argues Scotland could have the "best of both worlds", with a strong parliament at Holyrood and a secure place in the United Kingdom.

He compares independence to buying "a one-way ticket to send our children to a deeply uncertain destination".

And of course if you think back, recently Ruth Davidson blew Nicola Sturgeon out of the water on the BBC when she pulled out a letter that the SNP had never contacted the EU regarding Scottish membership of the European Union either as a government or as an opposition.

In submarine terms, Ruth Davidson took out Nicola Sturgeon with a bow shot, after that Nicola Sturgeon was left floating on her ‘liferaft’ in the ‘Pacific’ banging on the freedom drum.

Met many people and taught many people, but I was always an outsider because I am working class.

This blog highlights the situation I found myself in, but rather than the university paint me as a malcontent, they should stare straight in the mirror and look at themselves in the management.

Things have been bubbling away under the surface, discontent is brewing.

It seems that Lecturers are increasingly disenchanted with life at Glasgow University.

The latest survey for the university found a sharp decline in levels of satisfaction experienced by lecturers since 2009.

And there is only one direction of travel, downwards.

An internal report by Andrea Nolan, formerly of the Vet School and now the university's senior Vice-principal, said the move to replace nine academic faculties with four colleges in one year was "over-ambitious".

The take for me is people reaching beyond their abilities trying to build little empires and copy others.

I always said if the photocopiers break down, the effect would be to paralyse the ‘blue sky thinking’.

Copying others is a Glasgow University tradition, much like bullying working class people.

One reason for current unhappiness is the shedding of staff while at the same time protecting the riches for those at the top.

There is only so much room at the trough and the management eat with their elbows on the table.

Muscatelli took over as Principal from the despicable Sir Muir Russell who saw his salary jump.

When asked by a university reporter what vision he laid out to the interview committee, he couldn’t remember.

Russell however was a member of the private invitation only club called the Royal Society of Edinburgh and their members effectively have a monopoly in higher education in Scotland.

Some might say that it is a cartel.

Significant numbers of staff were bounced into projects with little value in my opinion such as the controversial £14m student enrolment website called MyCampus. When the site was launched much of it did not work, putting a greater workload on staff.

Patently why do a job right when a shambles will do.

As well as the fallout from that nightmare the university has also had to deal with the fallout from the occupation of the Hetherington Research Club by students and a botched attempt to evict them.

The university sent in Anton’s storm troopers aided by Police and with air cover overhead.

Muscatelli’s take:

"We have come through a challenging two years and that is reflected in some of the results that the survey has uncovered."

When is he going to resign so a decent Principal can be appointed?

Muscatelli added:

"We know that we need to communicate better and we are working to improve upon that. We will also look hard at the drop in feelings of enjoyment and loyalty, which again may be directly related to uncertainty during restructuring”.

This is spin, the University of Glasgow don’t give a f*ck about people’s enjoyment and loyalty, Muscatelli runs a rat ship.

I met more scum at human rights abusing Glasgow University than in any other place I have ever visited, stupid petty people who are just schemers to hide their fears at being found out they aren’t good enough to run anything never mind a university.

Friday, June 22, 2012

When the can of worms that was phone hacking was opened up, the fallout has been impressive.

Rupert Murdoch saw his power base go very quickly among the Westminster elite on both sides of the House of Commons.

His loyal lieutenant Rebekah Brooks who he publicly backed to sort out the mess has been charged by Police.

Murdoch and Brooks, were once the king and princess of a media empire.

Rebekah Brooks is charged with perverting the course of justice.

Now Brooks looks weary and downtrodden as she arrived at Southwark Crown Court to be told she may be charged with further offences in relation to Scotland Yard's probe into phone hacking.

Southwark Crown Court is famous for jailing MPs who fiddled their expenses.

While Brooks wonders if she might see the inside of a prison cell, over the other end of the world, global media mogul, Rupert Murdoch relaxes 1,000 miles away.

Fun in the Sun!

Carefree Rupert is merrily strolling along the sun-drenched Venetian canal walks, laughing with wife Wendi Deng and their young daughters.

Back in London; Brooks sits stoney faced with Charlie and their four co-defendants in the shadow of gallows.

And I don’t see her getting sympathy from a jury.

A trial date for the allegations that she hid documents and computers from detectives investigating hacking and bribing public officials has been pushed back to see if she is to be charged with further offences in relation to the Met's Operation Weeting.

Andrew Edis QC, prosecuting, said:

“So far as Mrs Brooks is concerned it is well known that there are bail dates coming up in context of another investigation known as Operation Weeting at the end of July or in early August. No definitive timetable has been set out for any charging decision whether yes or no, nevertheless it is likely that if there is a charge in relation to her that might impact on this case if there isn't that might also. If there were to be charges then consideration might have to be given to the format of this whole trial, who is to be involved and how many trials and so on.”

Expect Edis to be keen, this case is a landmark case for him and his career.

Trial Judge Mr Justice Fulford agreed:

“You need to know if this trial as it is currently constituted is going to take place”.

Edis also said they hoped for a decision on further charges by August 22.

He added:

“We are confident that the decision will be taken in time for this case to proceed smoothly.”

Brooks formerly edited the News of the World from 2000 before taking the helm at The Sun in 2003.

In 2009 she became chief executive of News International, you could say she has had a high profile career in the media but everything turned sour and then she quit her post last July when everything came out.

The phone hacking of murdered schoolgirl Milly Dowler turned the public off; the Murdoch’s couldn’t reset their image with either the politicians or public. And the investigations rather than clearing the air have only served to muddy things up.

News International has done a lot of good in exposing corruption in British Society, but the methods used were questionable, some people went too far and the reasons weren’t in the public interest, they were purely about selling newspapers.

A culture exists which the editors should never have allowed in the first place.

Brooks standing in the dock is the end result.

So, does the public face match the private one?

Stick around there is going to be a trial.

Or there is the Ecuadorian Embassy which is very popular at the moment?

Julian Assange is a controversial figure; the website Wikileaks has caused a sensation in leaking documents and evidence into the public domain that certain people would rather stay buried.

In a recent court appearance to fight extradition to Sweden, the UK Supreme Court dismissed his claim.

Assange is accused of sex crime and is wanted to face trial.

Last night in a dramatic turn he walked into the Ecuadorian Embassy to claim political asylum.

The Ecuadorian Government is considering his claim; however this act by Assange breaches his bail conditions since he is under curfew.

40-year old Assange is seeking asylum under the United Nations Human Rights Declaration.

The Met Police say now Assange is subject to arrest.

Their reasons as stated above is one of the bail conditions imposed on him by the High Court hasn’t be complied with in that he was stay at his bail address between 10pm and 8am.

A police spokeswoman said:

“At around 10.20pm on Tuesday June 19, the MPS (Metropolitan Police Service) was notified that Assange had breached one of those bail conditions. He is now subject to arrest under the Bail Act for breach of these conditions. Officers are aware of his location at the Ecuador Embassy in Hans Crescent, London.”

Assange is accused of rape of one woman and sexual molesting of another, these are serious charges and he should face trial.

Julian Assange says the allegations against him are politically motivated; however he hasn’t produced any evidence to this claim and certainly not at any hearing to extradite him.

One thing is certain; the Americans would dearly love the opportunity to get hold of him.

And if they do, he will go to prison in the US for life without parole.

Last month the Supreme Court the last stop for his appeal hit the buffers as they upheld a High Court ruling that his extradition was legal.

I previously blogged that he didn’t have a case based on that point of law.

Last week the same court refused an attempt by him to reopen his appeal against extradition, saying it was “without merit”.

And the UK Supreme Court has a reputation for flawless judgments.

Assange further last chance scenario centred round the European judges in Strasbourg to consider his case and postpone extradition on the basis that he has not had a fair hearing from the UK courts.

That would be dismissed because all along the line, Julian Assange has been treated fairly, and there isn’t a human right to escape justice.

Something that the Ecuadorian Embassy will no doubt be mindful of in their consideration of his case!

I can’t see in this case political asylum being granted, they will consider his request as a ‘flight from justice’ which rather than help him actually prejudices his case in Sweden.

It was the wrong thing to do.

When he steps out of the Ecuadorian Embassy, he will be placed into custody and bailed refused by a British Court until he is deported.

Tuesday, June 19, 2012

Awhile ago I watched a video made by Nicola Sturgeon of the Scottish National Party talking about support for independence.

From memory, she said that independence was about 49% or there about.

And polls change.

Now it seems that George Laird was right again regarding how the independence is being managed.

Voters are snubbing the SNP’s bid for independence in the wake of the Queen’s Diamond Jubilee.

Alex Salmond’s approval ratings are also hitting a new low.

In the Scottish Sun which backed the SNP for Holyrood, their recent poll revealed that more than half of Scots disagree with the First Minister’s plan to break up Britain.

Let us go back to the Glasgow Council Elections, after the Holyrood victory which was a landslide, there was a feeling among some in the SNP that they were going to take Glasgow.

But there were problems which weren’t addressed.

The SNP were openly bragging they would win the city; then they were bragging they would be the biggest party when things started going ‘south’.

In the end the result was as I predicted failure.

27 seats out of 79!

Clearly the package and the candidates put to the public didn’t appeal. I popped into the Sunny Govan Radio Hustings, the SNP leader was woeful in my opinion.

Anyway, what goes around comes round.

The latest news of the slump comes weeks after First Minister Alex Salmond launched his Yes campaign for the referendum.

The ‘Declaration of Cineworld’, which incidentally had the Avengers movie playing, with higher production values.

So to numbers, 55 per cent say they would reject independence.

Up five points since January, this will be maybe a concern to the Yes Scotland and again, highlights my view they need external oversight.

Less than a third of people surveyed say they would back splitting from the rest of the UK, a fall of four points.

And this is on the back of the launch; clearly George Laird radical thinking wasn’t employed.

Alex Salmond still remains the most popular party chief.

But his approval rating is sliding, I predicted a slide in approval ahead of time and it would be like quicksilver.

The gap between those who think he is doing a good job and those who don’t — has dropped nine points to 13.

13?

Unlucky for some, which reveals the lowest level of support since April 2010!

On that basis, the First Minister of Scotland Alex Salmond is now just one point ahead of the Greens’ Patrick Harvie who surprised me at the BBC Big Debate when he spoke to matters of fact, his approval rating 12 points.

Again, truth is the most effective asset in politics.

The bad news however is that Labour leader Johann Lamont’s support has soared since January.

38 per cent of voters believing she’s doing a good job, compared to 29 per cent who disagree, she has a nine point approval rating, up 15 points.

She isn’t there yet at being fully established, people need time, but it’s a different Labour Party under her leadership.

Lib Dem leader Willie Rennie has also lifted his approval rating by seven points, but he is still below zero at minus four. His problem is that the Lib Dems need a narrative to reconnect with voters; Tavish Scott fell on his rubber sword after Holyrood 2011.

By enlarge he did a reasonably decent stint as leader, presented well, had no real problems but he was wiped out by what the Lib Dems did down south.

Not his fault, but he paid the price nonetheless.

Voters haven’t warmed to Tory Leader Ruth Davidson of the Conservatives who scored minus six; she doesn’t have a narrative either to use as a base to make the leap.

Johann Lamont said:

“This shows that the more people hear the arguments, the more they see through the absurdities of Alex Salmond’s case for separation and the more they recognise the benefits of Scotland’s partnership in the UK.”

A spokesman for Mr Salmond said he remained “very confident of achieving a Yes vote”.

He added:

“We believe that the positive case for an independent Scotland will overcome the negativity of the Tory-led anti-independence campaign.”

Maybe the spokesman needs to go see the Avengers movie as well since he has lost touch with reality.

55 per cent say they would reject independence and that doesn’t take into account those who are undecided.

Yes Scotland is in a falling market and as I said again and again and again, there is a serious lack of talent in the Scottish National Party.

But there isn’t a serious lack of talent in George Laird; I proposed the Scottish National Police force and Scottish National Fire Service at the SNP National Assembly in Perth in September 2010.

And my lunch contained ham sandwiches and diet coke, because politics is really easy for me unlike some others I could mention.

I said poll after poll will be bad, I said Glasgow SNP won’t win the City Council, and George Laird is always right.

Monday, June 18, 2012

This is a response to your letter of 11th June 2012 re Complaint – George Laird.

I totally reject the allegation made against me that I have breached Standard 6 of the Code of Conduct.

For your information:

6 Every member has a responsibility not to discriminate in his or her conduct on the grounds of race, colour, gender, religious belief or non-belief or sexual orientation.

Nowhere in the post is there any reference to sexual orientation whatsoever either deliberately or implied by the author.

I have no idea how anyone could come to this conclusion, I therefore reject this disgusting insinuation totally.

The context which the phrase Gay is used means ‘happy’; I have enclosed for your benefit and others, the definition from the Cambridge dictionaries online’.

“Gay adjective (HAPPY )

Definition
•
old-fashioned happy

We had a gay old time down at the dance hall.
•
old-fashioned If a place is gay, it is bright and attractive
The streets were gay and full of people”.

Secondly, I would point out that there is no discrimination in the blog The Campaign for Human Rights at Glasgow University against people who by your own code of conduct fall within the standard six remit.

I use a higher standard of decency than the SNP currently use so rest assured, given news reports of countless SNP members acting like animals, Henderson may have mistakenly thought I am as vile as they are.

I unlike some others do not discriminate like former SNP member Tommy Ball who called British soldiers ‘uneducated racist thugs’, or Gail Lythgoe, MSP Humza Yousaf’s wife, who deliberately smeared the Labour MP Ian Davidson in an email to encourage a hate campaign against him, also Mark MacLachan who worked for SNP Minister Mike Russell who had a little cottage industry on his blog smeared others or David Linden who had to withdraw a twitter remark about George Foukles being drunk.

Funny enough they are and were all very close to the senior SNP leadership before being ‘outed’ and some still are, but I am sure you already know that because you are the convenor of the disciplinary committee.

At this point I wish to state that the word ‘outed’ doesn’t mean or have any sexual orientation or context, just in case you are unaware. Words can have different meanings for the people who read them, except when they are used to smear, then that is ‘mens rea’ otherwise known as ‘guilty mind’.

Thirdly, I enclose for your benefit and others my activism record which clearly shows my willingness to campaign for SNP candidates who are from the LGBT community.

Namely, John Mason, MSP and Councillor Grant Thoms, this is proof that I don’t discriminate on the grounds of race, colour, gender, religious belief or non-belief or sexual orientation plus a post showing my support for equal marriage, Appendix B.

And as I already just received a Data Subject Access Request from the SNP there is no evidence I have ever done so.

The first person I campaigned for in the SNP was John Mason in the Glasgow East by-election in 2008, when I wasn’t even a party member. 16 days! Not the act of someone who discriminates on the grounds of sexual orientation.

Grant Thoms was to be the candidate for the Glasgow North East by-election; which incidentally I did 66 days work for the party when I started campaigning for him. This is more than the numerous SNP MSPs and Councillors who did a few days because they were ordered to by HQ.

I have been involved in three campaigns for John Mason, 2008, 2010 and 2011, as you can see by the records, despite not being in his branch I have put in a considerable amount of work for him.

This is not the conduct of someone who discriminates on the grounds of sexual orientation, so my good conduct is backed up by the years I have selflessly helped him and others without hesitation.

What isn’t contained in my activism record of 17 SNP Campaigns and 203 recorded activism days in under 2 and a half years for the SNP, is the number of times I turned up to work for John Mason, and I was the only person to do so. Just him and myself delivering SNP material to voters! That is right, the only person to do so on a number of occasions, not one single member of his own branch turned up to help.

If this matter goes further I will seek outside representation from my Labour MSP, Johann Lamont who covers the area I live in, because I view this as a slur which has to be dealt very publicly.

I will be expecting a detailed NHS medical report from you verifying that Mr. Henderson is in fact a certified mind reader because I have in no way implied what Mr. William Henderson thinks he thinks I meant.

And I am not accepting his version and I am not responsible for what he thinks or how he wishes to interpret any post on The Campaign for Human Rights at Glasgow University to suit someone’s warped view.

Does the SNP operate a policy of innocent until proven guilty or do you operate as guilty until proven innocent?

I sincerely hope that you have proof and not subjective opinion on which to base this vacuous complaint on; because I already know, you have absolutely no evidence of me discriminating against anyone ever.

Under the Human Rights Act 1998, I am entitled to what is called ‘quality of arms’; that means equal treatment, therefore I would like answers to these questions.

I would like to know is William Henderson the actual complainer?

If he isn’t then who is?

On what date and time did he read the post in question?

How many people has Mr. Henderson spoken to regarding this issue?

Was Mr. Henderson directed to my blog by a third party?

If so, was the person an SNP member?

Was the person an elected MSP?

Was the person an elected councillor?

Was the person an elected SNP branch official?

If so which SNP branch and their names?

Is Mr. Henderson a member of the Maryhill and Springburn branch?

I put in a complaint on the basis I was the subject of a smear campaign within the Maryhill & Springburn branch to Alex Salmond, Nicola Sturgeon, Ian McCann, Derek MacKay and Peter Murrell which was confirmed in writing by Ari Mack, former GRA SNP Convenor.

This was over 8 months ago; can you tell when you received that complaint from Peter Murrell?

If you are the convenor of the SNP disciplinary committee why haven’t I heard from you regarding my complaint of allegedly being smeared? I have kept all the emails of this complaint safely stored.

Have I been discriminated against by the SNP or does it usually taken 8 months for you to act on complaints from poor working class members?

The post you refer to was dated 26th May 2012, 16 days from when you wrote your letter based on a vacuous unsubstantiated allegation.

Do rich middle class members receive a higher standard of service from the SNP when they lodge complaints?

I put in a complaint which I had two pieces of corroborating evidence which is the legal standard in a court of law, and I have heard nothing from you.

Is that not discrimination?

SNP MP Dr. Whiteford claimed she was threatened at Westminster and received the backing of the First Minister Alex Salmond and the SNP within hours of making an unsubstantiated complaint with no witnesses and George Laird after 8 months is still waiting for SNP ‘justice’.

Is that discrimination? Is that fairness? Is that equality? Is that social justice?

Was I discriminated on the basis of being white?

Was I discriminated against on the basis of being Glaswegian?

Was I discriminated against on the basis of being working class?

Was I discriminated against on the basis of my mother being Catholic?

Was I discriminated against on the basis of being poor?

Was I discriminated against on the basis of being middle aged?

Was I discriminated against on the basis of being a Christian?

When people smear me, it is not a private matter, under the Data Protection Act 1998; I will be invoking my legal right to record by way of audiotape, any and all hearings into this matter.

Please do not think for a minute I am ignorant of the law and my legal rights, your letter of the 11th June 2012 gives me ‘reasonable belief’ that I am possibly the victim of the crime of harassment.

And that ‘test’ needs only to be satisfied by me not the SNP, to record. There will no discussion on this point of law whatsoever but please do check with someone because it is important to establish facts.

This is my written statement and I wish all correspondence if this matter goes further to be sent to my elected representative Labour MSP Johann Lamont of the Pollok Constituency.

I hope this clarifies the matter and closes it, if not please get back in touch immediately so I can make an appointment to go see my elected representative Labour MSP Johann Lamont, then I will contact you and you can send the material and copy her into everything.

And I will hand over everything relevant to my elected representative to use to defend me against this unwarranted smear and harassment and I do mean everything. This letter also appears on my 8k to 10k a month blog which is read by other political parties, the press, and the BBC, STV and SKY.

If you are a regular reader to this blog and thousands are, then you will have read my continual analysis that in the Scottish National Party there is a genuine and serious lack of talent.

Now, it has come into the public domain, that SNP MSPs have been urged to drop the word “independence”.

The reason is because the concept is off-putting to voters.

Instead they are directed to talk about of an “independent” Scotland.

It seems that in the Scottish National Party things are now so bad that even SNP MSPs have to be taught how to speak and are to be censored.

Is that how First Minister Alex Salmond thinks that independence can be won?

It won’t be won by censoring free speech because people will see through it immediately; it is a stupid idea and an immature idea.

DON’T MENTION THE WAR!

That is the classic example.

I thought that Alex Salmond was clever once, now I do not, things are so bad that they think ‘tricks’ will work on the minds of the ordinary working class voters.

They don’t, that is a myth that the Alex Salmond middle class clique will find out soon enough when poll after poll shows that support for independence isn’t moving, then the panic will set in.

The dramatic shift has already been adopted by Alex Salmond and others at the top of the SNP who are getting the strategy of the independence campaign wrong.

It started badly at the infamous ‘Declaration of Cineworld’ and will continue right to the bitter end.

The disastrous strategy was rolled out to most of the party’s untalented MSPs at a secret meeting at Holyrood last Wednesday.

Imagine effectively being told that you are by default incapable of articulating the cause of independence, and they people are supposed to be ‘the best’.

So, what is the theory?

The theory is that being “independent-minded” is a positive personal quality voters like, whereas “independence” as a concept for Scotland is associated in voters’ minds with risk.

I wonder what idiot said that and why Alex Salmond and Nicola Sturgeon bought into it, they must be truly gullible to fall for that one.

It gets better; the advice was handed down by positive-psychology consultant Claire Howell, a long-term adviser to the SNP, who also drilled MSPs in the American marketing techniques that will be used to promote a Yes vote in the 2014 referendum.

This is so funny, positive-psychology, joke, bad joke but lets see 2014 if I am right, clearly Howell doesn’t understand the thought processes of ordinary working class people.

To return to the lack of talent in the Scottish National Party, SNP bosses have also circulated a campaign training manual based on text that appears to have been cut-and-pasted from US marketing websites.

Cut and paste without the benefit of learning will spectacularly explode in the faces of those people foolish enough to articulate this, with out fail.

Some MSPs it is said have reacted enthusiastically to Howell’s talk.

However it appears from reports that others were left angered and amazed, with junior minister Alasdair Allan openly objecting to dropping the word independence.

Former children’s minister Adam Ingram is also understood to have been unimpressed.

And George Laird is unimpressed also.

One senior SNP source said the political ideas behind independence seemed to be getting lost in a deluge of “marketing gobbledygook”.

The most effective case for independence is telling the truth, not trying to spin a story that they don’t wholeheartedly understand.

The SNP source said:

“It was about persuading people, and there’s a good reason for doing that. But voters admire you if you believe in something and show a bit of passion. That forum wasn’t really about the cause, it was marketing speak. She [Howell] was basically talking marketing tactics. This is becoming a bit of a guddle.”

The truth not being good enough, is it because the public might start looking closely at the people behind Alex Salmond and Nicola Sturgeon and asking questions?

It appears that the SNP under Alex Salmond and Nicola Sturgeon’s leadership don’t like free speech unless it is their version of free speech.

Launching the Yes Scotland campaign last month, the First Minister failed to say the word “independence” at all in his speech, day one and already backtracking, I think many will see the road more clearly now, it is the road to devo max.

Green MSP Patrick Harvie mentioned “independence” three times in his launch speech.

The website of Yes Scotland, the SNP-backed campaign for a Yes vote, also emphasises the word independent, with sections called “Becoming independent” and “Being independent”.

Osama Bin Laden signed up to Yes Scotland.

The pro-Union parties said the SNP’s “desperate” contortions over language showed it was afraid of its own key policy, because it knew voters were hostile.

And of course at present the senior SNP are trying to twist my words to portray me as homophobe because in the SNP it is okay to run a hate campaign acting in a ‘personal capacity’ like Humza Yousaf’s wife Gail Lythgoe but when you exercise free speech on a human rights blog that they don’t like it, you can be victimised and harassed for that.

Howell previously advised SNP members not to use “freedom” in the referendum, because of its association with the violent Mel Gibson film Braveheart.

Clown, she is a clown, so easily influenced by a production from Icon Productions.

Howell and SNP ‘strategists’ Angus Robertson MP and MSP Derek Mackay advised using upbeat terms such as “transformational”, “exciting” and “historic” when talking to voters about independence.

“It seems the SNP is finally realising what everyone else knows – most Scots reject their core policy of independence. Now they are desperately trying to repackage a bill of goods that people don’t want, and this latest attempt will fool no-one. Instead of spending his time listening to advertising gurus, Alex Salmond should start being honest with the people of Scotland.”

Willie Rennie, the Scottish LibDem leader, added:

“Would the SNP advisers call a spade a spade, or a soil-dividing implement because it sounds less offensive to worms? No matter how much the SNP resort to 1984-style Newspeak to make their plans sound more palatable, the voters will see right through them. Instead of playing with words the SNP should simply answer the voters’ questions."

The last word on this strategy should come from those SNP MSPs, who feel angered and amazed, how embarrassing to be brought into a secret meeting and told you are incapable of articulating something you have believed in all your live.

I would opine that anger will grow.

Independence can’t be won by tricks, spin, wee balloons, flag waving and all the low grade crap that the SNP thinks will turn people.

It can only be won by substance and so far, we have seen precious little substance coming from Alex Salmond and Nicola Sturgeon.

Independence in 2014 is dead, if Alex Salmond has the balls, then I will stick up £500 of my own money, if he will give me odds of 100/1.

If I win, the entire sum of my winnings goes to a charity, if he wins, he can do what he likes with my cash but I want a signed document of the agreement for both of us to sign in front of witnesses so the bet is formally recognised.

Friday, June 15, 2012

The Scottish National Party says it tough on crime, to that end there has been countless speeches about how crime is unacceptable from them and in turn the Scottish SNP Government.

Now, we are hearing that Braveheart Alex Salmond did not go to the police to complain about his bank account being hacked.

In other words the First Minister of Scotland has decided it is okay to let criminals go free.

His excuse for his behaviour is he wanted to protect his informant according to his spokesman.

Alex Salmond’s current view is it was the responsibility of the newspaper and not the police to investigate.

The Police investigate crime, that is their function, and being hacked is a criminal offence.

Does that mean that Alex Salmond views criminality as falling into two distinct categories?

And who can trust a man who is prepared to think that certain crimes shouldn’t be reported to the proper authorities, The Police?

Later on it is said Mr Salmond "did not rule out the possibility" of referring the matter to the police in the future.

So, when exactly would that be?

Is the First Minister storing up this for a ‘rainy day’ when things go badly for the Scottish Government, the SNP or the Yes Scotland Campaign and he is looking for a sympathy vote from the public?

Given his already stated position of not ruling out going to the police it seems his ‘concern’ for protecting his source isn’t as hard and fast, many would see this as a mixed message from the First Minister regarding trust.

Salmond’s spokesman confirmed that information that his bank account had been targeted was passed by a former Observer journalist in the early 2000s.

He would respect the confidentiality of that source.

If he goes to the Police, he will have to give up the name of his source; therefore he doesn’t respect the confidentiality of that source.

He can’t go to the police and refuse to name him otherwise Salmond would be wasting Police time.

Alex Salmond wrote to the editor of the Observer, John Mulholland, last July, saying:

"It has been brought to my attention that there was a strong suggestion that journalists working for the Observer accessed my bank account details in 1999. Could you please let me know if there is any truth or substance in these claims?"

This begs the question of how Alex Salmond thinks a competent investigation can be carried with no information being presented, does Salmond think that Mulholland pops his head out of his office door and shouts out, ‘has anyone been involved in criminal hacking of bank accounts?’

Maybe in Alex Salmond’s world, the guilty party immediately puts their hands up and says ‘I done it’!

A spokeswoman for the Observer said that on the basis of the information supplied by Mr Salmond they had been unable to find any evidence to substantiate his allegation.

Unable to find any evidence to substantiate his allegation on the basis of the information supplied.

Oh well, I think we can safely rule out the First Minister from standing for the Chief Constable of the Scottish National Police Force.

Given Alex Salmond’s apparent reluctance to see things investigated in a timeous manner, it in part satisfies me why bullying and smearing is rife in the Scottish National Party under his leadership.

It seems that when Alex Salmond is informed about incidents within his own party, he prefers to ignore them.

That isn’t the hallmark of a great leader, it is the mark of a coward, an opportunist and a man who has to ask serious questions about his own integrity.

Alex Salmond famously said:

‘My first duty is to the people of Scotland’.

So far I am still waiting for the First Minister to fulfil that duty to me, I have “only” waited over 8 months for an investigation into smearing and bullying in the SNP.

8 months.

DSAR sent to Peter Murrell, another Braveheart and freedom fighter, 80 days late and incomplete.

It seems the SNP commitment to justice leaves a lot to be desired from my personal experience in the party.

Currently, I am the subject to a smear campaign in that previous I was allegedly branded a sexual pervert in the Maryhill & Springburn branch, in the Pollok branch, I was according to Tommy Ball, the odious git I was branded a racist.

Now William Henderson the National Secretary of the Scottish National Party is attempting to brand me ’homophobic’ by twisting my words to suit his warped agenda from an article written on this blog.

I totally refute his disgusting allegation levelled against me and am doing so publicly because it is time that working class people such as myself received equal treatment and not be subject to such vileness.

Previously I have campaigned for members of the LGBT community and written several articles supporting the right of equal marriage for this community. Patently in his rush to smear me using the SNP rules he failed to take the time to probably research me.

But as I keep saying there is a lack of serious talent in the Scottish National Party, come the referendum, the people of Scotland will get their chance to deliver their verdict.

And the answer the independence campaign will be getting loud and clear from the working class is.

Thursday, June 14, 2012

All there is a train of thought going the rounds that an independence Scotland might have to surrender Faslane to the rest of the UK.

Defence is a serious issue in the independent debate.

So far there is no credible view being put forward by Yes Scotland on how Scotland will be defended other than lifting someone else’s work and saying effectively:

‘we’ll have that’!

Awhile ago the First Minister Alex Salmond was very vocal in stating that Scotland needed 3 airbases that the MoD was threatening with possible closure of one or more.

Now, it seems Alex Salmond has now backtracked and says Scotland needs only one, actually we do need 3 for operational issues.

Which two does he want to close?

And is the judgment based on any review carried out by the Scottish National Party and independently peer reviewed?

No one knows as far as I can tell and probably no one is asking the difficult questions, but the difficult questions will have to be answered sooner or later, and in great detail.

I have no problem with the UK Government using the nuclear submarine base at Faslane for the US and UK deep water fleet, in fact I welcome their commitment to Scotland, not in just bring jobs, but also a recognition of the important role Scotland has in the NATO alliance.

I am pro NATO, and not pro ‘partnership for peace’ which in my opinion is non military nonsense.

If Scotland was to vote for independence and that is highly unlikely now, it would have to face sharing the multibillion-pound bill of decommissioning the nuclear submarine base.

The weapons could be moved to nuclear grade weapons facilities down south and even, stored in a joint facility in France, those are options available to the UK Government. There would be a cost on upgrading facilities down south I understand in the region of £50 million.

Anyway, Nick Harvey, the Armed Forces Minister has told MPs on the Commons Scottish Affairs Committee that relocating the deterrent would be the Ministry of Defence's "least favourable option".

I have to agree his judgment is spot on, and sooner or later the SNP will have to move to being pro NATO and pro nuclear submarine base at Faslane.

The George Laird view.

The bombshell of decommissioning is a gift described as a titanium-clad "egg" as the launch venue for the cross-party campaign against independence, Better Together kicks off.

Funny enough, the YES UK campaign have decided to go ‘historic’ with a gravitas launch in the futuristic 200-seat Lindsay Stewart building at Napier University.

Imagine someone having the skill and presence of mind to launch in an educational institution instead of the local Cineworld.

Yes UK launch will be hosted on Monday, June 25 2012.

That is a historic date in modern political Scottish History which will be analysed by politics departments in future years.

The event will be led by former Labour chancellor Alistair Darling, a senior politician and arguably the man with the most important role in recent Scottish history.

The weight of his gravitas will way heavily on the Yes Scotland Campaign.

As well as Darling, there will be Annabel Goldie for the Scottish Conservatives and former Liberal Democrat leader Charles Kennedy.

So, the fight begins, meanwhile down the road at Yes Scotland, more than 4000 people have volunteered to help the pro-independence cause since the launch of the Yes Scotland campaign by Mr Salmond less than three weeks ago.

A senior campaign source insisted:

"It's a big figure. It works out at 76 people per constituency and that's just within three weeks”.

In a modern fight it isn’t how many people are willing to be used delivering leaflets; it is the quality of the message.

Wednesday, June 13, 2012

The Scottish National Party has run into trouble over a number of issues which they don’t have answers, NATO, European Union membership and monetary policy.

On NATO, the SNP has been anti NATO for about 30 years, 30 years of getting it wrong with few challenging the disastrous policy publicly within the party itself.

NATO is the cornerstone of the Western Alliance, recently Deputy First Minister spoke of Scotland being involved in a ‘a partnership for peace’ with countries like Norway.

When I heard the ‘partnership for peace’ line, I thought it was something which could be used for a housing association, its nonsense, utter nonsense.

On the BBC Big Debate, Nicola Sturgeon also blown out of the water on Europran Union membership when Scottish Tory Leader Ruth Davidson pulled out a letter which stated the SNP had never as a government or as an opposition written to the EU to know if Scotland would still retain membership if it leaves the UK.

The short answer is no it would not; there is no agreement between Brussels and the Scottish Government.

Scotland would have to apply as a new member state and part of that is joining the Euro, an unstable currency.

Monetary policy is another area where the ‘work’ hasn’t been done; again, Nicola Sturgeon stated that Scotland would be able to join the Bank of England monetary policy committee.

The word came back pretty quickly from Westminster, no; they won’t get a seat and they won’t get any influence either.

Add to this a number of large countries whose currencies are shared with a smaller neighbour have recently confirmed they do not give them any say over key decisions on monetary policy.

The USA, Australia, Switzerland and South Africa Governments all say they retained full autonomy over issues such as the setting of interest rates, without offering a say to nearby nations which also used the same currency.

This leaves the SNP with a credibility gap, after making assumptions of what they thought they would get as an ‘entitlement’, they are finding out they will get nothing.

The SNP wrongly argued that it would be able to influence the Bank of England on the crucial issue of money supply, given its importance to the UK economy.

This is the difference between international politics and provincial politics, the correct solution is to prepare for a Scottish pound.

Yesterday, Deputy First Minister Nicola Sturgeon said Scotland would, if required, pay the Bank of England to provide “lender of last resort” facilities to Scottish Banks, to ensure the country was copper-bottomed.

This is another assumption that the Bank of England will agree, there is no agreement on that and probably like the EU debacle no paper work that the Scottish Government has entered into negotiations either.

At a recent First Minister’s Questions, Alex Salmond was dropping strong hints at a formal deal, saying Scotland would “expect to be part of the appointments process” of the Bank of England’s monetary policy committee (MPC).

He added:

“There is nothing unusual about that… these are arrangements that are put in place between independent countries.”

That statement turned out to be completely vacuous.

Although the Bank of England has been “independent” since 1997 you can completely forget Scotland having any input.

Sooner or later, someone is going to have to draw up a plan for a Scottish pound, it is the only credible route which is sellable to the public.

At Westminster General Elections; the SNP do pretty badly because they aren’t trusted on international matters.

And the major hiccups so far all stem from matters handled currently by Westminster.

Scotland isn’t ready for independence, the Scottish Government isn’t ready for independence; the Scottish National Party isn’t ready for independence and the Yes Scotland campaign well that is just a joke.

Another gaffe is the SNP’s plan to maintain a UK-wide oversight of its financial sector after independence which may be illegal under EU law, things aren't being thought-out to their logical conclusion and it shows.

2014, the public get the last laugh but the public won’t be laughing with Alex Salmond and Nicola Sturgeon, they will be laughing at them.

Tuesday, June 12, 2012

Slogans can help define a campaign, pick the right slogan and it can lodge in the minds of the public and stick.

The classic example is ‘Labour’s not working’ used by the Tories to usher in 18 years of Tory rule under Margaret Thatcher.

The YES UK campaign has come up with a slogan “Better Together”.

For their campaign it is an excellent slogan to use, it is also been used by others namely to front an NHS Scotland programme.

It isn’t usual for political parties to use bits of other people’s material, the Scottish National Party ran with a slogan ‘be part of better’ which looks like it was lifted straight out of the SKY broadcasting slogan “believe in better”.

The YES UK campaign has set up a limited company called Better Together Ltd much in the same way as the SNP set up Yes Scotland as a legal entity.

Former chancellor Alistair Darling is among the directors and is a leading light in the YES UK campaign.

In the latter end of the Brown regime, Darling was seen as the man with gravitas, what Alex Salmond is to populist politics, Alastair Darling is to serious politics.

In recognising the power of such a positive slogan, the SNP have accused the anti-independence campaign of “hiding behind a phrase already in use” and of copying a name that supports NHS boards, staff and patients.

When visiting people in hospital, visitors sometimes take grapes, however the SNP seem to think this is a time for sour grapes.

It isn’t, it doesn’t matter what the other side is doing if you believe in the strength of your own campaign and the arguments that back it up.

If someone is doing something different, it is worth looking at but reality is that Yes Scotland should already have an encompassing strategy in place of how they intend to run their Yes Scotland Campaign.

If they intend to make it up as they go along they will become unstuck.

Case in point, the ‘Declaration of Cineworld’, rushed, botched and woeful.

This was one abortion that wasn’t carried out on the NHS and it showed!

SNP MSP James Dornan said that the Better Together campaign, which is due to be launched next week, was “failing at the first hurdle”.

Does that mean that Alex Salmond nicking the bit of the American Constitution was also “failing at the first hurdle?”

The YES UK is going to be a serious campaign, a professional campaign and a positive campaign, the Yes Scotland campaign will have to match them.

Given the lack of talent in the Scottish National Party, as displayed at the ‘Declaration of Cineworld’, they better get their thinking caps on for Yes Scotland and start to outsource.

Now, we will find out how clever Alex Salmond and Nicola Sturgeon are in a ‘falling market’.

My analysis is they are going to go spectacularly bust with their current strategy.

And as the SNP know, George Laird is always right and ahead of the curve.